If you consider that the NHL makes the least amount of revenue among the four pro leagues and also probably has the highest operating expenses it makes sense that NHL players would make considerably less than their counterparts

Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:If you consider that the NHL makes the least amount of revenue among the four pro leagues and also probably has the highest operating expenses it makes sense that NHL players would make considerably less than their counterparts

Here's a quick comparison between NBA and NHL:

The NBA's revenue is most comparable, as they're in that $3- to $4-billion range just like the NHL. The difference, or possible even more, can likely be found in TV deals.

The average NBA season runs ~8 months while the average NHL season runs ~9 months.

Both leagues have an 82-game schedule, and both have a fair amount of travel - though I believe the NHL has more.

Many NBA teams play in arenas that are owned and/or operated by NHL teams, so there is more overhead in playing home games.

The average NBA coach's salary is over 3x higher than the average NHL coach's salary. ($3.4-million vs approx. $1-million)

As of 2011, NBA players had the highest average salary of the four major pro sports leagues at $5.15-million.

There's no doubt the NHL has high operating expenses. I'm just not convinced that, financially, there is a huge difference between the NBA and NHL aside from how much players (and coaches, apparently) get paid. Obviously, the NBA getting 50/50 in last year's CBA is a major factor in the NHL's negotiations.

Has the idea of a mediator ever come into play? Seems like the only way to work towards a real compromise.

Anyway, it's now the end of November. Both sides ought to shut the fork up about how much money they already lost and lose every day and how much they sacrifice yadda yadda yadda. You do no get any sympathy from the fans, you bastards. Deal with it.

With the NHL asking for the back diving clause "cap circumvention deal" to be eliminated and to be put into effect on current back diving deals. It could spell cap trouble for alot of teams in the league. I think even Sids deal is built like that???

Yes, "talent" will always have more leverage than the average North American worker, and NHL players are not your average union. They have all-world physical talent in their chosen field. That has value in a multibillion-dollar industry where pride and profit escalates profits and thus salaries. And you, the player, are reaping it. Wildly. As Keith Jones would tell me over and over again while I was working on his book "Jonesy" with him: "It's all fantasyland, man."

But the more games are canceled, the more the players will lose -- even if they think they will win. CBAs come and go. Careers are short. Players are EXTREMELY well paid. Live below their means and many can be set for a life of choice. Sacrifice a year (or more) of that for ... what? The players would be smart to push for a deal. Your business is your play; they are NOT separated. If you want to sit, by all means sit. If you want to play, fly charter and stay in Ritz-Carltons and enjoy a pension and summers off, tell Fehr to make a deal. And the season would start in two weeks.

Because, in the end, it's all mostly luck for all of us. Lucky when Daddy has hundreds of millions and gives you a cushy front-office job. Lucky you have good genetics and loving parents. Lucky, for me, to live in a country that loves sports so much it can support so many 24-hour sports cable enterprises and lucky enough that I work for the biggest one that gives me free Disney passes.

It's all luck, and then we die. Don't be so caught up in greed and money and "winning." This isn't the Industrial Revolution; Donald Fehr isn't Che Guevara.

Be smart, make aggressive compromises/deals, and grab your hockey bag. I know you're going nuts anyway. You're still going to be rich, and the fans will still love you and hate the suits.

Yes, "talent" will always have more leverage than the average North American worker, and NHL players are not your average union. They have all-world physical talent in their chosen field. That has value in a multibillion-dollar industry where pride and profit escalates profits and thus salaries. And you, the player, are reaping it. Wildly. As Keith Jones would tell me over and over again while I was working on his book "Jonesy" with him: "It's all fantasyland, man."

But the more games are canceled, the more the players will lose -- even if they think they will win. CBAs come and go. Careers are short. Players are EXTREMELY well paid. Live below their means and many can be set for a life of choice. Sacrifice a year (or more) of that for ... what? The players would be smart to push for a deal. Your business is your play; they are NOT separated. If you want to sit, by all means sit. If you want to play, fly charter and stay in Ritz-Carltons and enjoy a pension and summers off, tell Fehr to make a deal. And the season would start in two weeks.

Because, in the end, it's all mostly luck for all of us. Lucky when Daddy has hundreds of millions and gives you a cushy front-office job. Lucky you have good genetics and loving parents. Lucky, for me, to live in a country that loves sports so much it can support so many 24-hour sports cable enterprises and lucky enough that I work for the biggest one that gives me free Disney passes.

It's all luck, and then we die. Don't be so caught up in greed and money and "winning." This isn't the Industrial Revolution; Donald Fehr isn't Che Guevara.

Be smart, make aggressive compromises/deals, and grab your hockey bag. I know you're going nuts anyway. You're still going to be rich, and the fans will still love you and hate the suits.

The players have pushed for a deal, hence the NHLPA's offer yesterday. Twitter was littered with reports that the proposal came after a huge amount of pressure was put on Fehr by the players, and Fehr would "neither confirm nor deny" it.

Love to decertify the union. The owners then should consider that all players can only be signed by their last NHL team for whatever the team wishes but with a salary cap more in line to what they need. ie. $50 million. Let's see how that works out. Players with salaries now might be very happy seeing what they can get from their same team.

I hope they do and that the courts compare the NHL (a small sport compared to NFL, MLB and NBA) and laugh at the ridiculously high contracts, call the lock-out legal and then the league can start again with 55-45, no guaranteed contracts, minimum salary of 250K, maximum duration of contracts 5 years, 5% max salary difference, no no trade clauses. Take it or leave it, players. Or go to the KHL.

If I were the owner I would be making a naughty and nice list right now in case of decertification. Crosby/Toews/Staal/OV I offer you $3.5 a year, no benefits, and you have to sweep the room, and wash the towels after every game... Hamrlik you make $8 a yr. Thanks for being a voice of reason.

I think Bettman is a VERY smart man. If the NHLPA decertified and new rules are made, I feel the players may get more than they bargined for

good disband the NHLPA get rid of Fehr... the NHL will rip the players a new one in the next CBA. Players are morons. They are thinking with their wallets only. They dont care about other players. Pensioners are NOT getting paid while this is going on. Ridiculous.

There are a handful of people on there that understand the implications of decertification, but comments like these just make my head hurt. This may be the best comment on there right now...

I don't think some people here get this decertifiction thing! It becomes the wild west.NO Labour rules.Teams would try to out spend each other. Like they do now but with no restrictions except thier own wallets.The only ones who kinda win is the elite players. This would definately cause teams to fold.No draft! Players going to the highest bidder at the age of 15.The wild wild west.The owners tring to police themselves. Even they know they can't do that. Just look at these contracts given out trying to circumvent the rules they already have in place! It will become a league of haves and have nots.

It really draws a good comparison to the current proposals where the NHL is trying to put in contractual restrictions to protect owners from themselves.

What is this nonsense about desertification of the Union i keep hearing about all of a sudden? Is this just pure speculation or is there merit to this? This isn't something for someone to just drum up and go with if there is no substantial evidence of the NHLPA willing to do this course of action. Desertification would mean the end of hockey and the end of the Penguins. I would never watch again.

MRandall25 wrote:NBA and NFL PA's decertified. They turned out fine. It's one of the few pieces of hard leverage the players have.

But... if they actually did that and it made it through the courts and the courts sided with the players, then you would have no free agency, no draft, no labor laws, no minimum salary, no contract guidelines. That would be awful for.... like everyone on both sides.

MRandall25 wrote:NBA and NFL PA's decertified. They turned out fine. It's one of the few pieces of hard leverage the players have.

But... if they actually did that and it made it through the courts and the courts sided with the players, then you would have no free agency, no draft, no labor laws, no minimum salary, no contract guidelines. That would be awful for.... like everyone on both sides.

Did it even get to the courts in the other leagues? If the players do it, I'd have a feeling the owners would start to give in before it got to court.

MRandall25 wrote:NBA and NFL PA's decertified. They turned out fine. It's one of the few pieces of hard leverage the players have.

But... if they actually did that and it made it through the courts and the courts sided with the players, then you would have no free agency, no draft, no labor laws, no minimum salary, no contract guidelines. That would be awful for.... like everyone on both sides.

Did it even get to the courts in the other leagues? If the players do it, I'd have a feeling the owners would start to give in before it got to court.

I don't know dude. These are the NHL owners we are talking about here. I hardly think this would work as some sort of a scare tactic. I would see 3 possible outcomes with that course of action.

1. The courts side with the owners and the lockout continues. Also, it costs both sides money in court fees, fees the owners will be much more accepting to pay.2. The courts side with the players and all the former stipulations take place and suddenly you have the select few top level players making out in this new system. It hurts the vast majority of players and hurts all the owners not named the Rangers, Flyers, Leafs, Canadians and Bruins.3. It's settled before it can make it through the courts and the players end up spending more money in court fees while still getting the same deal or a worse deal.

I don't see a positive here. Please correct me if i'm totally off base here.

You're leaving off the part where the owners crack and try to work a deal.

It's not that inconceivable. They'd rather make a deal than have decertification, one would think. I think the majority of the owners would convince the hardline 8 that it's not worth the risk in court.

I think the players would be OK with the court fees if they got the owners to bend on the offer.